Slashdot Mirror

Maybe you can have the cake and eat it at the same time if you pre-blame others for anything that might (and probably will) go wrong in the future. I think this is just a preemptive PR strike by a company that has always been savvier about marketing than about technology, because that's where the money is.

I don't give a WRAT SASS about your opinion!!! I wasn't the one claiming to be the grammAr guru. By the way, mine wasn't a grammatical mistake, it was a speeling misteak. LOok up grammar in the dictionary, fool: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/grammar

Embolden: Origin: 1495-1505
Incentivize: Origin: 1965-1970
Not exactly new, eh?
As for "impactful", I agree, it needs to go. Maybe doubleplusimpact?

Embolden: Origin: 1495-1505
Incentivize: Origin: 1965-1970
Not exactly new, eh?
As for "impactful", I agree, it needs to go. Maybe doubleplusimpact?

The name of the damn contest is "The Slamdance Guerilla Gamemaker Competition." That would be "guerilla" as in "a member of a band of irregular soldiers that uses guerrilla warfare, harassing the enemy by surprise raids, sabotaging communication and supply lines, etc."

I missed one word in the sentence. It does not invalidate what I said in general. I have no confusion with evidence. The definition of "evidence" I am using is the one you can find in the dictionary here.

As in evidence is used to prove or disprove. But as I said, a negative proof is a logical fallacy. A negative proof and disproving something shouldn't be confused as the same thing, though.

#1. Threat - Airplanes being hijacked and used as missiles. Solution - Stronger flightdeck doors. They should be strong enough to defeat a hijacker for at least 15 minutes so that the pilot can notify the authorities and land somewhere. There, you will no longer have the threat of airplanes being hijacked and used as missiles. A whole class of threats are removed with one change.

We still do not know how the doors were opened, if it was entirely by force, if the terrorists located a key to the cockpit, or if they threatened to kill a crew member if the door was not opened. Pre- 9/11, authorize members of a crew had keys to get into the cockpit in emergencies. The strength of the doors is just fine.

#2. Threat - Airplanes being hijacked and flown to other countries. Solution - More undercover security on the planes.

Do you really think that there hasn't been an increase in undercover security on planes? Do you really think that this would be publicly announced? Here is the definition of 'undercover' from dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/undercover/ :

undercover /ndrkvr, ndrkv-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uhn-der-kuhv-er, uhn-der-kuhv-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation -adjective
1. working or done out of public sight; secret: an undercover investigation.

#3. Threat - Airplanes being blown up with bombs. Solution - Improve bomb detection at the entrances (including overwatch of baggage handlers).

Security for checked baggage has been increased. The scanning process is monitored much closer. Of course you would have seen this when you packed yourself in an overnight bag and had a friend check it onto a plane so you could support this claim of yours. If I am not mistaken, nothing gets on an airplane now without getting through a security check.

You are wrong. People die on the roads every day and yet most of us still have no problem driving.

Come on now, people don't have have problems flying, just go to any airport around a holiday and you'll see this is a bunch of propaganda. However, people do want flying to be safer. It is just like their desire for airbags in cars, and seatbelts...

What we don't tolerate, no matter how statistically miniscule, is people intentionally killing other Americans, even still feeling so strongly after having lived in our own society and culture for months or years.

No. The problem is how the media hype the statistically minuscule threats BECAUSE THEY ARE STATISTICALLY MINUSCULE. They are news because they are NEWS. Someone dying in a car wreck MAY make the local news. But that's it. It's common. It happens. Just about everyone knows of someone who died that way. It is not NEWS.

A terrorist cell targeting the United States of America is not a minuscule threat. The piece you were replying to is talking about intentionally killing people. Someone dying in a car wreck is comparing apples and oranges. 9/11 was not media hype, it was an organize group of people who truly loathe the US and sought out to cause mass chaos in the United States as well as striking fear into its citizens.

Just like those people won't understand change they can't see, others likely will continue to doubt that there are and have been massive initiatives to improve security, communication, and intelligence at all levels, security "theater" aside.

And what the fuck does THAT have to do with this discussion? I'm talking about security and what does and does not improve security. And how wasting money on practices that cause false positives is a NEGATIVE for security.

But.. 'same' is not identical to 'identical'. Or is it?

"Same" can mean either same entity or (in some restricted contexts, not here) same category.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=same

When people talk about the unity of the Abrahamic religions, they are clearly talking about the same entities, not the same categories of entities: they aren't saying that there are two separate gods that happen to have the same name and properties, or two separate figures that both happen to have been called Jesus and both happened to die on the cross, they are saying that there is one entity of each, shared between the two religions.

Ahh, the good old dictionary comes to the rescue.

A "bye" in this context means "they will be excluded from the requirements." So, if you're flying from certain countries and you're a citizen of that country—e.g. Great Britain—you might not have to give a full print set, but if you're from others, you will. It's sense #1 in this definition.

First, I was raised Catholic (but I'm feeling much better now) and know a fair bit about the god worshipped by Christians, thank you.

Spent some time as a Muslim too, have you? If not, it doesn't change my point. If you have, and then left, normal teaching of both Catholicism and Islam as I understand it would assert that you had failed to understand correctly about god. Certainly that was Jesus teaching. You can check it out in Matthew 13:18-23 .

Second, the question of what's considered important about Jewish/Christian/Islamic teachings about god to those faiths, is irrelevant to the question of whether those faiths historically emerge from worship of the "same" god.

Not when those teachings are about who god is. In any case, Islam did not "emerge" from anything. As I said in my previous post, it is considered that the Koran was a revelation to Mohammed in it's entirety. The fact that they have common ancestry is not relevant. The relevant point is this: the god written of in the bible and the god written of in the koran are so different in character and nature that they cannot be the same god. History is irrelevant if they are not worshipping the same god today, because we are in today.

If you're going to agree that all Christians worship the "same" god ... you have to admit Muslims into that club also. To do otherwise is simple bigotry.

bigotry: -noun, plural -ries.
1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

You don't seem to understand what that word means. I'm not being intolerant, I'm just acknowledging that they are different. I don't think even a single Muslim I've known would claim that I've been intolerant of them. If two things were the same and I called them different, I'm not sure what word would describe that, but bigotry isn't it.

The word "child" has a specific meaning, and an embryo is not a child.

pregnant: -adjective
1. having a child or other offspring developing in the body; with child or young, as a woman or female mammal.

You are using neither the dictionary definition nor historical common use of the word. You are using a narrowly defined meaning which has the only purpose of justifying the killing of embryos.

Having children is most often a selfish indulgence of the parents. They have children to satisfy their own egos and lifestyle.

What scientific method did you use to determine the motives of parents? What was the size of the sample used in the research? What peer reviewed journal is this study published in?

Backpedaling.

Pedaling is to use pedals to operate something. like those on a bike. Backpedaling sometimes causes said machine (think ancient sewing machine) to reverse.

Peddling is to sell your wares.

Backpedaling.

Pedaling is to use pedals to operate something. like those on a bike. Backpedaling sometimes causes said machine (think ancient sewing machine) to reverse.

Peddling is to sell your wares.

Backpedaling.

Pedaling is to use pedals to operate something. like those on a bike. Backpedaling sometimes causes said machine (think ancient sewing machine) to reverse.

Peddling is to sell your wares.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Theseus

Do you know what percentage of immigrants, documented or otherwise, are from Mexico?

The Pew Hispanic Center states that 57% of illegal aliens are of Mexican origin and about 75% are of Latin American origin as of March, 2004.

You want privilege, look to the Irish.

Interesting that you would bring up the Irish. When they immigrated en masse to the US, there were none of the anti-discrimination laws that exist today. The Irish were treated far worse than Mexicans are today.

Even so, the US is not facing a wave of Irish immigrants. No, we're facing a wave of immigration from Mexico and the rest of Latin America. Your argument there is an irrelevant red herring.

And yet you call risking your life, which people from all over central and South America do not just Mexicans, privilege?

The ability to immigrate here is set in American law. Those American laws are there of the American people, by the American people, for the American people - not the citizens of Mexico or any other country. So yes, it is a privilege for foreigners to immigrate here, not a right.

If US immigration laws cause problems for foreigners, then tough shit. Those laws aren't there for their benefit.

While it is quite possible they meant 'menial', as that is the common phrase, they might also have meant just what they said.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=medial
2. pertaining to a mean or average; average.

The Grid is used for complex, processor-intensive tasks, I'm sure. The regular daily cruft is probably still done on the old mainframe. Those would be 'medial tasks'. If they made it into a monitor instead of a system that does processing, that might be considered menial. (I'm having a hard time finding 'menial' tasks a computer can do...)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=menial
1. lowly and sometimes degrading: menial work.

Sooo... If you're going to be grammar police, please do your homework first.

While it is quite possible they meant 'menial', as that is the common phrase, they might also have meant just what they said.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=medial
2. pertaining to a mean or average; average.

The Grid is used for complex, processor-intensive tasks, I'm sure. The regular daily cruft is probably still done on the old mainframe. Those would be 'medial tasks'. If they made it into a monitor instead of a system that does processing, that might be considered menial. (I'm having a hard time finding 'menial' tasks a computer can do...)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=menial
1. lowly and sometimes degrading: menial work.

Sooo... If you're going to be grammar police, please do your homework first.

Don't even know why I'm bothering to reply to an AC... but;

Read this.

Arabs are also semites... A more accurate prejudice would make this selective-Semitism, not anti-Semitism

Well sure, if you redefine the word 'ethical' to mean something different from what everyone else (including the dictionary, philosophers around the world, and many more people who have studied the issue longer than you have). The rest of us will stick to the standard definition, in which case it is a valid use of the word.

Your posting style matches the writing style used to leave threats, even using the "duck" reference. It is called deduction.

Deduction, eh? So which am I doing? Subtracting? Deducing? I have to admit, I am following deduction when it comes to logic, but that has nothing to do with threatening or ducks. Unless, you find my ability to "use reasoning to make conclusions based on a premises" threatening your ability to spread conclusions based on conjecture. [grin]

Amazing how a CEO takes credit when a company is profitable, but when something bad happens, all of a sudden they are quick pass the blame somewhere else. So much for "The buck stops here" way of thinking.

Steve Jobs's contribution to Apple's profitability is very real. Upon his return to CEO (in an interim capacity at the time) one of the first things he did was kill off old projects that were leeching money off the company. Returning focus of Apple to its core products helped conserve money while the company as a whole regrouped. Also, remember that Apple's inability to ship a major, modernizing update to the Classic Mac OS was causing loss of investor confidence and contributing to the problems at Apple. OSX is based off NeXTStep, the operating system made by NeXT, which is the company of -- Steve Jobs. Had Steve not started NeXT after being ousted from Apple originally, the new MacOS would have had to been based off BeOS. The earlier statement by me that Steve was greatly responsible for Apple's turnaround was my own opinion, not Steve's inflated ego.

It seems you suggest a career as a parent I wonder how much that pays you?

Uh, no. If you'd really read my post, and TFA the summary is for, you'd see I suggested more people try the job of a parent on a trial basis before they decide to take on the responsibility permanently. I think many people have kids without considering how big a job it really is. Also, not to sound corny here, but I'm sure many people with children would tell you that being a parent is very rewarding and pays them immensely, though not in dollars. The fact you would only think about the rewards of a career in a paycheck perspective also shows you probably are fairly young.

You seem to talk about applying for supermarkets for a career.

Once again, your statement has no basis in reality. The original Ask Slashdot poster was upset they could not fill out the job application on paper and the provided kiosk was having hardware issues. Rather than do even cursory research on other ways of applying, the submitter came to this website to play the U.S. classic "victim" thinking of calling a lawyer. The application was available online and the submitter could have filled it out from the comfort of their own armchair, had they bothered to look. I never made any statement about grocery stores as career choices.

Apparently you want children to be more responsible just not adults like you and Apple Execs, if you actually are an adult.

There is nothing wrong with wanting children to be more responsible. Children will fall down, get hurt, have problems in their lives. The 'culture of fear' perpetrated by the media (and to a lesser extent) the government, create the idea in parents heads that their children are constantly in danger. This combined with heightened competition in school and the job market and the desire for parents to see their children have a smooth journey while growing up leads them to be overprotective and intercede more often in the course of their lives than they should.

They don't want to see their children fail or get hurt, but their efforts ultimately hamper their child's ability to learn to deal with these situations on their own. Children grow to be adults, and mom and dad wont be their forever. What will they do when they get o

It behooves you? Are you sure?

Look at the title bar of the Fedora Project web page. It says: "Sponsored by Red Hat Linux"

Follow the money, that is where the control will be found.

• The Golden Rule: "whoever has the gold, rules."
• The Shit Sandwich Rule: "if ya got a lot of bread, you don't have to eat shit."
• etc.

I vote you get Word of the Day credit for "defalcation". Most definitions specify that it relates to misuse or embezzlement of money or funds, however, so I'm not sure it's quite the right term in this context. Still, Word of the Day props to you!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sarcasm

This research group focused the polution in Kazaa9. Pollution refers to meaningless files and mismatches between filenames and their actual content. Kazaa was found to be severly poluted. For many recent pop songs, more than 50% of the copies were polluted. Our research group at Delft University has found similar polution levels in Kazaa for all types of content.

"deign" does not mean "decide"...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/deign

1. to think fit or in accordance with one's dignity; condescend

So tell me again, who is the selfish twat?

This is why slashdot sorely needs a "retarded" moderation.

Definition of "cause"

1. a person or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect: You have been the cause of much anxiety. What was the cause of the accident?

"The producer of an effect" sure as hell sounds like "set in motion" to me.

I think it's mash as in, 'mashing on the keyboard'. The keyboard doesn't end up in bits, you're just slamming it or pushing it real hard. I always saw a 'mash-up' as, say, two things heading towards each other at high speed and then slamming together to create one object... but maybe that's just me...

First definition on http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mash is crush anyways.

Free, definition number 36.

Your comments about the murder rate vs. terror rate and torching the constitution were strong.

You lost me with the conspiracy theory about the neocons planning 9/11. As much as I distrust Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their puppet, the theories about missles hitting the Pentagon just aren't credible to me. At most, I will believe that 9/11 was a happy accident which Cheney leveraged to enrich his friends at Haliburton. He sold it to Bush as an opportunity to finish what his dad had started. Rumsfeld? Well, that guy wanted to prove a war could be fought on the cheap and wanted to take credit for that accomplishment. Turned out it can be fought on the cheap, so long as you're not concerned with winning.

Seth

Look up the word 'ideology'. It does not mean 'bias'. It does not mean 'disruption'. It does not mean 'elite'.

I'm very sorry that your favorite book didn't get a review in the NY Times. Life just isn't fair, is it?

So are you saying "No, not really: there is no such thing as astroturfing" or "No, not really: I know PreacherTom, and he's neither a paid shill or a figment of the imagination of a Business Week marketeer"? Because if he has a financial/business interest in the story he's submitting, that should be disclosed. As you say, an interesting story is still interesting even if hyped by a "crier", disclosure notwithstanding, right?

Really, like feeding/clothing/housing the poor, like Jesus? Sure you "Social Conservatives" talk a good game, but when it comes to real action, you're just political players. Even your charities are only provided with strings attached.

Frankly you'all need to come to the conclusion that the neo-cons have fucked you like a back street whore, and paid you with counterfeit money.

Rhetoric, the undue use of exaggeration or display. Perhaps I need to explain "undue" as well. The thing that pisses 'us' off the most about them is that most do not know their game, and it is a game. The loser is society, and the first casualty is the truth.

You clearly indicate that you understand that they are lying/ misrepresenting themselves, and you see nothing wrong with it, as a 'balance' for the 'lies from the left'. Bullshit, you better hope that God doesn't have a conspiracy clause for the eight Commandment or you'll be roasting in hell with the rest of them. That's our basic problem on the American left we just can lie like you'all. When someone talks about global warming I need to see proof, not the hyperbole, slander, and smear, so often 'employed' by those you venerate. Sure there are some who are 'too left' for me, and I will openly disagree with them, I have. Unlike you and others like you, I DO NOT BLINDLY SUBMIT TO ANY MAN, and those few whom I choose to follow know my disagreements, even if I choose to table them. Also, I do not believe that I can force others to bend to my will, besides, those who 'bend too easily' have little for me and do not significantly add to my understanding of the world; Unlike Rush and Anne I have no proper use for worshipers such as yourself.

"phoneME" sounds rather close to phony...nyet, comrade tovarisch?

Kazaa from Kazoo
From Kudzu
From Kudu
From Kodo...

Kazaa from Kazoo
From Kudzu
From Kudu
From Kodo...

Kazaa from Kazoo
From Kudzu
From Kudu
From Kodo...

Kazaa from Kazoo
From Kudzu
From Kudu
From Kodo...

Kazaa from Kazoo
From Kudzu
From Kudu
From Kodo...

And a company thinking they can be fascist about everything risks losing their employees.

I'd agree with everything but the last clause. The word 'right' is exactly the proper descriptor of the first class of entity, and of no other. Law does not create rights, it either respects them or it violates them.

Bizarrely, the American Heritage Dictionary seems to agree with you, as the main definition:
1. That which is just, morally good, legal, proper, or fitting.

However, I would argue that this is not a very useful definition for 'right', because then you raise the substantial issue of who defines that which is just, morally good, proper, or fitting. My definition would be much close to:
2.g. Something that is due to a person or governmental body by law, tradition, or nature.

Why it's down as 2.g. I don't really know; when I've encountered the word, it's generally meant this instead. If you look down the page a bit, 'WordNet' defines this as the #1 meaning.

So basically, it looks like the whole problem with this is a simple one - the definition of the word 'right'. Shame we can't settle on one, but I'd argue that 2.g. is the most useful definition as I've described above.

The most basic mechanism for redress is also a fundamental right - the right to defend oneself. Any legitimate law enforcement function consists of acting as an agent of the victim.

You could define it that way, but the trouble is that then you have to agree with the sentence (as far as I can tell), "It's a paedophile's right to rape any child they want." This right is enforced by their own self-defence. Of course, that sounds nonsensical and it is, because we commonly think of rights as things that are morally acceptable to 'most people', but that's such a grey definition that it's pretty useless. More useful to say that a right is a government-enforced guarantee, and that if it's not but you think it should be, just say, "I think they should have the right..."

Dubai's Kulkarni QS will manage the project, while the task of rotating an 80,000 tonne tower through 360 degrees over a seven day period has been handed to Nick Cooper, managing director of Bennett Associates, the British engineer who designed the drill machine that bored the English Channel Tunnel.

Cooper said state of the art bearing systems at several points in the tower will allow a power plant to rotate the base of the tower at 5mm per second using only 21 electic kettles' worth of solar power.

1. Since it will take a full week for a complete revolution, that means that a given view indicates both the day of week AND the time of day. Think of enjoying the view at your neighbor's home and getting all confused as to what day/time it is. :O

2. This will make for an interesting exercise in real estate law. Said apartment, starting at the central elevator shaft on the 50th floor and heading 100 feet due east, no, wait. That's east-north-east. Man, this is going to take FOREVER! But seriously, has anyone seen a property deed for something like this?

3. "only 21 electic kettles"
   electic
   eclectic
   electric

   (insert witty comment here about tea parties and electic electric kettle selection. :^)

4. Note to other posters: I have heard of rotating restaurants and/or observation decks - this is not an utterly new concept. So, getting the utilities (water, sewer, electric, etc.) to the residents is a matter of scaling past solutions.

5. Lastly: I admire their interest in getting something as immense as a WHOLE SKYSCRAPER to rotate, continuously, for years on end. I just hope they'll be able to get their hands on a good supply of lubricant. <grin>

Dubai's Kulkarni QS will manage the project, while the task of rotating an 80,000 tonne tower through 360 degrees over a seven day period has been handed to Nick Cooper, managing director of Bennett Associates, the British engineer who designed the drill machine that bored the English Channel Tunnel.

Cooper said state of the art bearing systems at several points in the tower will allow a power plant to rotate the base of the tower at 5mm per second using only 21 electic kettles' worth of solar power.

1. Since it will take a full week for a complete revolution, that means that a given view indicates both the day of week AND the time of day. Think of enjoying the view at your neighbor's home and getting all confused as to what day/time it is. :O

2. This will make for an interesting exercise in real estate law. Said apartment, starting at the central elevator shaft on the 50th floor and heading 100 feet due east, no, wait. That's east-north-east. Man, this is going to take FOREVER! But seriously, has anyone seen a property deed for something like this?

3. "only 21 electic kettles"
   electic
   eclectic
   electric

   (insert witty comment here about tea parties and electic electric kettle selection. :^)

4. Note to other posters: I have heard of rotating restaurants and/or observation decks - this is not an utterly new concept. So, getting the utilities (water, sewer, electric, etc.) to the residents is a matter of scaling past solutions.

5. Lastly: I admire their interest in getting something as immense as a WHOLE SKYSCRAPER to rotate, continuously, for years on end. I just hope they'll be able to get their hands on a good supply of lubricant. <grin>

Dubai's Kulkarni QS will manage the project, while the task of rotating an 80,000 tonne tower through 360 degrees over a seven day period has been handed to Nick Cooper, managing director of Bennett Associates, the British engineer who designed the drill machine that bored the English Channel Tunnel.

Cooper said state of the art bearing systems at several points in the tower will allow a power plant to rotate the base of the tower at 5mm per second using only 21 electic kettles' worth of solar power.

1. Since it will take a full week for a complete revolution, that means that a given view indicates both the day of week AND the time of day. Think of enjoying the view at your neighbor's home and getting all confused as to what day/time it is. :O

2. This will make for an interesting exercise in real estate law. Said apartment, starting at the central elevator shaft on the 50th floor and heading 100 feet due east, no, wait. That's east-north-east. Man, this is going to take FOREVER! But seriously, has anyone seen a property deed for something like this?

3. "only 21 electic kettles"
   electic
   eclectic
   electric

   (insert witty comment here about tea parties and electic electric kettle selection. :^)

4. Note to other posters: I have heard of rotating restaurants and/or observation decks - this is not an utterly new concept. So, getting the utilities (water, sewer, electric, etc.) to the residents is a matter of scaling past solutions.

5. Lastly: I admire their interest in getting something as immense as a WHOLE SKYSCRAPER to rotate, continuously, for years on end. I just hope they'll be able to get their hands on a good supply of lubricant. <grin>

Uh, you would trust a user-entered quote on imdb over the dictionary? WTF is wrong with you? Actually the encyclopedia link (to wikipedia) there helps us out:

In the movie, the power required is pronounced "one point twenty-one jigowatts". Although this pronunciation of "gigawatt" was once considered the correct one, it is no longer the most common. (In addition, since Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale were unfamiliar with the term, they misspelled it in the script.) Because of this, a "jigowatt" will sometimes be referred to on Internet forums as a fictional unit or to make fun of someone's electrical knowledge. The spelling "jigowatt" is used in the novelizations of films 2 and 3. However, the book of the original film uses the correct spelling "gigawatt".

http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=pract ical&ia=luna

Click, and read.

Now tell me which definition of the word 'practical' you are using to describe being forced to pay for something you are not going to use in order to purchase something that you *are* going to use.

You are confusing 'practical' with some other word.